About your Search

20120901
20120930
Search Results 0 to 3 of about 4
took place in our office about four weeks ago, which the fbi is continuing to investigate as an act of domestic terrorism. i would like to mention the investigating agencies and professional and -- professional and very helpful. i am not sure the gravity of what happened or almost happened on august 15 was fully captured in the reporting immediately following the event. more importantly, i think this is a moment for all of us to understand the responsibility we have as we advocate for causes to which we are all committed. when the shooter entered our building at approximately 10:45 a.m., he placed his backpack down in front of the security desk. leo was temporarily manning that desk. leo thought to assist him, and the assailants reached into his backpack and pulled out a 9 millimeter pistol. in the ensuing few seconds, three rounds were fired. as the fbi has reconstructed it, the first bullet, which struck the elevator control panel in the lobby, was just a few inches above leo's head as he ducked. uck, e not remembered to deat he would have been struck right in the head. the second
department that there were increasing security concerns in benghazi? the fbi says it is too dangerous to be in benghazi, which is why none of them are there now. is that because the>> as we dets of what took place there and how that attack took place, it became clear that there were terrorists who had planned that attack. that is when i came to that conclusion. as to who was involved, what specific groups were involved, i think the investigation that is ongoing hopefully will determine that. >> about a day after? >> it took a while to get some feedback as to what exactly happened at that location. >> there was a thread of intelligence reporting that groups were seeking to coalesce, but there was not anything specific, and certainly not anything specific to the consulate that i am aware of. as far as the risks of the fbi reported, you really would have to ask them why they made that determination. >> did you make the state department aware of the intelligence? >> the intelligence that we all get is broadly shared among intelligence agencies and all integency partners. >> i wanted to go
next year. i guarantee you. but doing it across the board, cuts into f.b.i., it cuts into our defense, it cuts into border patrol, it cuts into the basics and the heart of what we're doing and we cannot do that. the house passed a very specific plan for dealing with this last may. it is complete for us. now it's time for the senate to actually do their job and it's time for the president to send that out over to us. with that i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from maryland. mr. van hollen: i reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the gentleman from new jersey. mr. garrett: madam speaker, at this time i yield to a third gentleman from california, over here, the gentleman from california, four minutes. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california four four -- r four minutes. >> thank you. thought i'd fool you. go to the left. it fools a lot of people. mr. speaker, i rise in support obviously of h.r. 6365, the national security and job protection act. do we need any more evidence that recent events in egypt and libya, than to oppose these d
, mr. speaker, who served in the f.b.i. and federal prosecutors and in the military, they support it. e democrat-led house passed this bill in 2008 with former speaker pelosi giving a glowing speech extolling the virtues of the underlying bill and excourting her colleagues about the necessity of passing it. and all of this happened, mr. speaker, because intelligence is the lifeblood of our ability to defend ourselve it happened, mr. speaker, because this bill has nothing to do with americans on american soil. it happened in the past, mr. speaker. because this provides protecons for americans who are traveling abroad. it passed because there is ple oversight. it passed because it has the needed checks and balances between the legislative branch and the executive branch and the judicial branch. so why the opposition, mr. speaker? how can you explain supporting something when ms. pelosi had the gavel but you can't support it when mr. boehner has the gavel? and what i want to do, mr. speaker, just for today, just for today is let's put down the red herrings and the straw arguments and the m
Search Results 0 to 3 of about 4